National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of interest,
and that it is within lending limits set by government
(which some, such as Auckland may well be contained by anyway).
2. They have not plans for where houses will be built, or who they
will be used for, or when they will be built - there are already a
large number of sevctions ready for houses to be built - this money
will make no difference to housing availability for many months.
3. Quite a few people have pointed out that it is merely a knee-jerk response to a crisis that National has consistently denied exists . .: http://www.act.org.nz/posts/nationals-paper-tiger-housing-policy
More spin, lies, obfuscation and fudging from the current incompetent government
On Sunday, 3 July 2016 19:12:47 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of
interest,
It's interest free, Dumbo.
and that it is within lending limits set by government
(which some, such as Auckland may well be contained by anyway).
2. They have not plans for where houses will be built, or who they
will be used for, or when they will be built - there are already a
large number of sevctions ready for houses to be built - this money
will make no difference to housing availability for many months.
Ooh, many months!
Idiot.
3. Quite a few people have pointed out that it is merely a knee-jerk
response to a crisis that National has consistently denied exists . .:
http://www.act.org.nz/posts/nationals-paper-tiger-housing-policy
More spin, lies, obfuscation and fudging from the current incompetent
government
What lie would that be? Dickbot fails to control himself once again.
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 01:22:51 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 3 July 2016 19:12:47 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of
interest,
It's interest free, Dumbo.
A simple mistake
- yes it is interest free to the local authority, but
not to the government.
They still have to replay the capital in 10 years, which probably
mitigates against any social housing . . .
and that it is within lending limits set by government
(which some, such as Auckland may well be contained by anyway).
2. They have not plans for where houses will be built, or who they
will be used for, or when they will be built - there are already a
large number of sevctions ready for houses to be built - this money
will make no difference to housing availability for many months.
Ooh, many months!
Idiot.
Yes you are - thre are subdivisions that have infreatrusture ready for
50,000 houses
but the houses are not being built - just what
difference do you think this theoretical money will do?
3. Quite a few people have pointed out that it is merely a knee-jerk
response to a crisis that National has consistently denied exists . .:
http://www.act.org.nz/posts/nationals-paper-tiger-housing-policy
More spin, lies, obfuscation and fudging from the current incompetent
government
What lie would that be? Dickbot fails to control himself once again.
I read today that the government has actually paid out one conditional
loan of $5000 for a person in Auckland to relocate to Invercargill -
we haven;t heard if there were any payments under the previous $3000
offer. Typically, National makes announcemnets that are not worth
anything; this appears to be another - do you think ACT are wrong in
the article I cited above?
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 01:22:51 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 3 July 2016 19:12:47 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of
interest,
It's interest free, Dumbo.
On 3/07/2016 10:54 PM, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 01:22:51 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 3 July 2016 19:12:47 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of
interest,
It's interest free, Dumbo.
Even that dimwit, Little, sailed in with his eyes closed and mouth wide
open completely missing the fact that the loan was interest free to
councils.
He's a complete embarrassment to Labour, and there's bound to be trouble >soon, unless they can gag him. Get someone to do the talking under the >pretense that Little has laryngitis or something.
On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 09:33:46 +1200, Fred <dryrot@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 3/07/2016 10:54 PM, Rich80105 wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jul 2016 01:22:51 -0700 (PDT), JohnO <johno1234@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Sunday, 3 July 2016 19:12:47 UTC+12, Rich80105 wrote:
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of >>>> interest,
It's interest free, Dumbo.
Even that dimwit, Little, sailed in with his eyes closed and mouth wide >open completely missing the fact that the loan was interest free to >councils.
He's a complete embarrassment to Labour, and there's bound to be trouble >soon, unless they can gag him. Get someone to do the talking under the >pretense that Little has laryngitis or something.
The policy is still too little, too late, does not address the problem
of demand, or the problem of land banking, and is effectively a
subsidy to developers, who will demand and get a reduction in the
costs of developer levies. As ACT pointed out, the councils can
already borrow money - but NAtional control that through restrictions.
It still leaves the government pulling a dividend out of Housing Corp
and selling off state houses for developments that do not replace the
number of social housing units. Peter Dunne says:" we still lack a
coherent housing plan - it's why we need a Housing Summit to bring one together"
This morning on Nat Radio we had Grimes softening us up for the
government purchasing property under the public works act.
Its all smoke and mirrors really - the government will treat the
borrowing as a capital asset in its books to offset the external loan
- they don't want to affect a manipulated surplus by actually spending themselves, but will happily extend accomodation assistance to make up
for low wages (effectively a wage subsidy) to ensure profits to their
backers continue.
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a greatit is available for local
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all -
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of >interest, and that it is within lending limits set by government
(which some, such as Auckland may well be contained by anyway).
2. They have not plans for where houses will be built, or who they
will be used for, or when they will be built - there are already a
large number of sevctions ready for houses to be built - this money
will make no difference to housing availability for many months.
3. Quite a few people
On Sun, 03 Jul 2016 19:12:53 +1200, Rich80105<rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a greatit is available for local
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all -
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of >>interest, and that it is within lending limits set by government
(which some, such as Auckland may well be contained by anyway).
2. They have not plans for where houses will be built, or who they
will be used for, or when they will be built - there are already a
large number of sevctions ready for houses to be built - this money
will make no difference to housing availability for many months.
Once again you condemn a policy without knowing all the facts.
Just another example of paranoid hatred instead of rational debate.
3. Quite a few people
Are you talking about comrades on the pinko network
have pointed out that it is merely a knee-jerkIt is very sad when someone (Rich on this occasion) allows their own agenda to dictate a condemnation od an attempt to address a real need.
"knee-jerk" As in condemning a policy with your head up your arse.
ROTFLMAO! Please Dickbot go back to school and do at least year 11accounting.
Labour/greens only want to impose a CGT and ban Chinese from buying a house.It is very sad when someone (Rich on this occasion) allows their own agenda to >dictate a condemnation od an attempt to address a real need.
3. Quite a few people
Are you talking about comrades on the pinko network
have pointed out that it is merely a knee-jerk
"knee-jerk" As in condemning a policy with your head up your arse.
The government's initiative may not be ideal but it is at least an attempt - I >cannot recall any intelligent suggestion from the opposition parties to provide
assistance, can you?
Tony
National is offering $1 billion of funding for housing - a great
headline, but the fine print shows that:
1. They are not providing it at all - it is available for local
authorities to borrow - provided they are able to afford the cost of interest, and that it is within lending limits set by government
(which some, such as Auckland may well be contained by anyway).
2. They have not plans for where houses will be built, or who they
will be used for, or when they will be built - there are already a
large number of sevctions ready for houses to be built - this money
will make no difference to housing availability for many months.
3. Quite a few people have pointed out that it is merely a knee-jerk response to a crisis that National has consistently denied exists . .: http://www.act.org.nz/posts/nationals-paper-tiger-housing-policy
More spin, lies, obfuscation and fudging from the current incompetent government
| Sysop: | sneaky |
|---|---|
| Location: | Ashburton,NZ |
| Users: | 2 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 41:23:06 |
| Calls: | 2,117 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 11,149 |
| D/L today: |
315 files (11,412K bytes) |
| Messages: | 952,755 |